[MD] Collective intelligence (Granger)

[Ron Kulp]

[Marsha]
There is snow, and there are snowflakes.  Which concept is correct by
the MOQ point-of-view?

[Ron]
Both, (by MOQ) and by my understanding of it. I think the argument has
gotten lost in terminology.
An "either/ or " logic has deveolped . The crux is where one defines the
boundaries of self.
Ham and horse disagree on "source" Ham defines Essence as source where
Horse holds Pirsigs view
Of Quality. Ham sees Quality as incomplete...As I see it Ham posits an
eternal 0 vs. 1 dichotomy
Which is percieved as finite value sense of subjects and objects. We can
percieve no other way.
Horse holds to value pervading all, "every last bit." and value is
infinite.

So there is the school of value is infinite and perception of it is
finite and
the school of the eternal struggle of existence and nothingness
percieved as finite value.
The distinction is the belief in absolutes. MOQ does not hold absolutes

Other opinions are welcome







  


moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/